Obsidian are notorious for release bug-filled products...

[C2B]

 

 

 

I had no problem with the PC controls. Maybe you're just whiny?

 

The only place I've ever seen anyone say that game had good controls was here; pretty much any other forum not loaded with Obsidian fanboys agrees the controls are a **** show unless you use a gamepad (which is idiotic for a Diablo clone).

 

I didn't say the controls were "good", just that they were not awful. And yes, in fact I happen to own the game for both the PC and the 360 so I've also been able to compare.

 

But then again, I also played Psychonauts, RE4 and Silent Hill 2 with keyboard controls. I think there are just a lot of whiny people who complain about the wrong stuff. Maybe the controls weren't 100%, but who cares? There's more important things than that to a game.

 

No, there aren't. A car can be the greatest car in the world, but if the steering wheel is ****ed up it doesn't matter.

 

Also it's not like we're talking about some complex game here, but a Diablo clone (and a rather simple one at that).

 

 

1. A Dark Alliance clone (Which in itself is based on games that predate Diablo)

 

2. It's still playable. I mentioned it before, but there are tons of ports out there where certain actions in the pc version are literary impossible due to them not binding the action to a key.

 

3. Are the PC controls sub-par to bad? Yes, absolutly. Are they unplayable? No. 

 

But all that **** doesn't really matter in this post. You're repeating the same thing again and again and again to a really sad degree. Who exactly do you want to get this message to? Why the hell do you care so much about one aspect of a game you don't even really seem to like?

[jethro]

Tight deadlines and release dates seem to be the cause of bug-related issues for Obsidian.  Given that this game, while having an unofficial release date, is basically a "it's done when it's done" type deal, I don't think you'll see the same issues crop up.

 

It's not that easy. Without a publisher they don't have a demanding nanny breathing down their neck, but they still have a finite budget. There is some leeway through company money, but that is probably much less than a publisher could supply. So they still have to meet a deadline

[Infinitron]

Yes, I hope nobody here is under the illusion that Kickstarter games are going to be a "it's done when it's done" type thing. When Obsidian runs out of our Kickstarter money, and any other money they manage to raise, the game has to be released. Period. Let's hope their project management skills are up to snuff.

Edited July 17, 2013 by Infinitron

[Chrononaut]

That's why the graphics choice for PE is so good. Even if the game has bugs in quests at least we won't have to deal with the horror story of a Neverwinter Nights 2-style rotating camera, or our graphics card trying to burn down our house for using AA because of bad optimization.

[C2B]

Yes, I hope nobody here is under the illusion that Kickstarter games are going to be a "it's done when it's done" type thing. When Obsidian runs out of our Kickstarter money, and any other money they manage to raise, the game has to be released. Period. Let's hope their project management skills are up to snuff.

 

On the plus side. Much less problems regarding patch support.

Edited July 17, 2013 by C2B

[Rostere]

 

 

 

I had no problem with the PC controls. Maybe you're just whiny?

 

The only place I've ever seen anyone say that game had good controls was here; pretty much any other forum not loaded with Obsidian fanboys agrees the controls are a **** show unless you use a gamepad (which is idiotic for a Diablo clone).

 

I didn't say the controls were "good", just that they were not awful. And yes, in fact I happen to own the game for both the PC and the 360 so I've also been able to compare.

 

But then again, I also played Psychonauts, RE4 and Silent Hill 2 with keyboard controls. I think there are just a lot of whiny people who complain about the wrong stuff. Maybe the controls weren't 100%, but who cares? There's more important things than that to a game.

 

No, there aren't. A car can be the greatest car in the world, but if the steering wheel is ****ed up it doesn't matter.

 

Also it's not like we're talking about some complex game here, but a Diablo clone (and a rather simple one at that).

 

 

Don't be such a whiner again. If you thought DS3 was too tough for you to play properly, go back and practice until you learn. It's not that hard.

 

I understand if the controls could have been better, but who cares about such a banal part of the game as long as it is perfectly playable, really.

[moridin84]

Yeah, I'm concerned about this too. So concerned that this topic was actually my first post on these forums late last year

 

Well from what I've gathered they have a serious bug tracking platform these days which they used with Dungeon Siege 3. And they do know what a bad reputation they have for buggy games. I'm sure they are going to avoid it if they can. 

Edited July 17, 2013 by moridin84

[Dream]

Don't be such a whiner again. If you thought DS3 was too tough for you to play properly, go back and practice until you learn. It's not that hard.

 

I understand if the controls could have been better, but who cares about such a banal part of the game as long as it is perfectly playable, really.

Bayonetta was tough, Dark Souls was tough, NetHack was tough; DS3 was just annoying. Also, having **** controls by definition means a game is not "perfectly playable."

 

 

Why the hell do you care so much about one aspect of a game you don't even really seem to like?

I care because people seem to think DS3 represents some kind of turning point for Obsidian when in reality it simply shows that instead of cutting corners during QA they instead decided to cut corners when porting the game.

 

Simply put they haven't changed at all.

[C2B]

 

Don't be such a whiner again. If you thought DS3 was too tough for you to play properly, go back and practice until you learn. It's not that hard.

 

I understand if the controls could have been better, but who cares about such a banal part of the game as long as it is perfectly playable, really.

Bayonetta was tough, Dark Souls was tough, NetHack was tough; DS3 was just annoying. Also, having **** controls by definition means a game is not "perfectly playable."

 

 

Why the hell do you care so much about one aspect of a game you don't even really seem to like?

I care because people seem to think DS3 represents some kind of turning point for Obsidian when in reality it simply shows that instead of cutting corners during QA they instead decided to cut corners when porting the game.

 

Simply put they haven't changed at all.

 

 

They cut a lot of corners, actually (The bad multiplayer camera is also one of those). May have something to do with DSIII being their lowest budgeted game so far. For a 2011 game with *AAA* production values actually ridiculously low.

 

But, lets not pretend their other games were great ports when it came to controls and UI. F:NV and K2 can be somehow forgiven since they are both reiterating on a previous game, but Alpha Protocol had completly consolized controls and UI. Holy Hell Alpha Protocol's UI (Hacking minigame to name one of the more broken complaints)

 

I would actually say its worse in that case (as with many other things regarding AP) since they had time there. DSIII's pc controls were finalized in a rushjob during the last months from a completly consolized gameplay system. AP was a shooter.

 

So, yeah. While I get your complaint, I don't think its accurate and I don't think they haven't changed at all. They have. On AAA games console controls will sadly always be a priority for publishers (Chris Avellone even said in an interview he was tired of developing focused for console controls).

Edited July 17, 2013 by C2B

[Dream]

So, yeah. While I get your complaint, I don't think its accurate and I don't think they haven't changed at all. They have. On AAA games console controls will sadly always be a priority for publishers (Chris Avellone even said in an interview he was tired of developing focused for console controls).

 

Fair enough, hopefully you're right and Obsidian ends up proving me wrong.

[Tick]

Are we talking hilarious bugs or just game-breaking bugs?

 

If it's Bethesda-engine-style quirkiness, where a dog's eyeballs are just outside of it's eye sockets, or I can accidentally fly through the sky and walls, or Doc. Mitchell's head cranks upside down and he starts floating, I'm looking forward to this. :D

 

I'd hate to get F:NV's earlier lock-up spamming, though..Or quests that I can't finish.

[Tauron]

The good thing, depending on your kickstarter involment is that you will get to be beta tester, I intend to beta test as much as possible, without revealing too much of main story line.

 

[moridin84]

Yeah I dunno how beta testing will work considering the way to test an RPG is to actually play through the game. Which would go through the story. With an RTS you can just keep to the skirmish / multiplayer modes. 

Edited July 18, 2013 by moridin84

[Lephys]

They can give us test scenarios in which to test the systems, without giving us the specifics of the story. Obviously, their in-house QA people will have to handle all the making sure everything works in the finalized version. But, for a lot of things, they can present us with test quests and battles and such to make sure all the triggers and systems are working properly in conjunction with one another.

 

There's a game on Steam Early Access right now... Folk Tale? Something like that... that's doing something similar. Although that game's less narrative than something like Eternity, they're actually presenting actual system-based minigames to their funders to test the systems.